Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Stanford v. Cockrell

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 11, 2010

BRUCE F. STANFORD, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ROBERT L. COCKRELL, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. Upon filing of this action on August 10, 2009, a status/scheduling conference was set for January 7, 2010. As of December 29, 2009, the docket reflected that plaintiff had not effected service of process on defendant and the court sua sponte continued the status/scheduling conference to February 11, 2010. Plaintiff failed to appear at the continued hearing or file a status/scheduling conference statement. Plaintiff has also failed to effect service of process within 120 days of the filing of the action as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).

Plaintiff shall show cause in writing within 30 days of the date of this order why appropriate sanctions, including but not limited to dismissal of this action, should not be imposed for failure to: (1) file a status/scheduling conference statement; (2) appear at the February 11, 2010 hearing; and (3) effect timely service of process. Plaintiff shall also serve defendant and file a return of service within 30 days of the date of this order. Failure to comply with any portion of this order may result in dismissal of the action. See Local Rule 110.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100211

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.